Speaker Johnson Launches Inquiry into DOJ Surveillance of Congressional Epstein File Searches
House Speaker Mike Johnson has announced he is personally investigating serious allegations that the Department of Justice under Attorney General Pam Bondi has been monitoring the search histories of members of Congress examining files related to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. The revelation emerged during Bondi's contentious testimony before the House Judiciary Committee this week, sparking immediate constitutional concerns about executive branch overreach.
Photographic Evidence Sparks Congressional Outrage
During Wednesday's heated hearing, a photographer captured a page from Attorney General Bondi's briefing binder that appeared to document Representative Pramila Jayapal's search activity on Department of Justice computers. Congressional members possess special authorization to review un-redacted Epstein documents, but the apparent surveillance of their investigative work has triggered alarm across party lines. The image quickly circulated among lawmakers, with some labeling Bondi's binder a "burn book" tracking their every move.
"I've heard the allegations and I'm looking into that myself," Speaker Johnson told reporters on Thursday. "It would obviously be an important line that's crossed, and obviously we can't allow for that." The Louisiana Republican emphasized that such surveillance would represent a dangerous breach of congressional oversight authority and separation of powers.
Democrats Warn of Chilling Effect on Oversight Investigations
Top Democrats on the Judiciary Committee expressed profound concern about the implications for congressional investigations. Representative Jamie Raskin, the committee's ranking Democrat, stated: "We're out there trying to do our investigative oversight, and they've structured a situation where they're basically spying on our every move. So the attorney general knows what material we've looked at. I would have liked to have known what material she was looking at before she came in."
Representative Mary Gay Scanlon, another committee member, warned that the surveillance could have a "chilling factor" on legitimate congressional oversight. "I'm wondering if I can, apparently, one of the issues is you have to log in under your name. I'm wondering if I could log in under Donald Trump or something," Scanlon remarked, highlighting the absurdity of the situation.
Bondi's Controversial Testimony and Epstein Investigation History
Attorney General Bondi's appearance before the Judiciary Committee proved particularly contentious, marked by personal attacks against Democratic members and a refusal to acknowledge Epstein survivors present in the hearing room. This controversy follows Bondi's previous claim on Fox News that she possessed Epstein's "client list" on her desk for review, a statement contradicted by the Department of Justice's subsequent two-page memo concluding Epstein likely died by suicide without maintaining such documentation.
The bipartisan effort to release Epstein files gained overwhelming congressional support last year, passing nearly unanimously in the House and by unanimous consent in the Senate. However, lawmakers have since criticized the heavily redacted nature of released documents, which obscure potential co-conspirators while sometimes revealing survivor identities.
Hypocrisy Concerns and Constitutional Implications
The muted Republican response to these surveillance allegations contrasts sharply with their previous outrage over special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into former President Donald Trump. Senator Lindsey Graham previously inserted provisions into spending bills allowing senators to sue if their phone records were searched without notification, though the House later repealed these measures.
Representative Deborah Ross of North Carolina articulated the fundamental concern: "Pam Bondi has not been complying with the law, and now she's making it harder for members of Congress to do her job. That is wrong." Ross noted the revelation had forced her to reconsider her investigative strategy regarding the Epstein files.
The developing situation raises significant questions about executive branch transparency, congressional oversight authority, and the ongoing investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's network nearly seven years after his death in federal custody while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.
